Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. You'll receive an email shortly with a link to create a new password. If you have trouble finding this email, please check your spam folder.

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To access our archive, please log in or register now and read two articles from our archive every month for free. For unlimited access to our archive, as well as to the unrivaled analysis of PS On Point, subscribe now.

Capitalism needs to be made inclusive. It has tended to be very exclusive when left to itslef. And the prospects of capitalism becoming inclusive through the kind of private sector measures listed here are slim to none. Capitalism would have become inclusive far earlier if it was in its intrinsic nature to support substantial and meaningful inclusive paradigms.

"Inclusive growth" is an oxymoron the way humanity tries it today.
The key is the final purpose and there are only two directions there is no middle ground.
Today growth is done for self-benefit, increasing profit, for constant quantitative growth.
This creates a pyramid system where the bottom of the pyramid works and consumes for the profit of the peak of the pyramid. The increasing social inequality, the gradual loss of the bottom half and the collapse of the system is built into it, since it has no natural foundations.
Only with the purpose of working, "growing" for each other, for the well being of the whole, since all individual's profit and prosperity depends on the whole can create a a sustainable system, where the parts mutually supporting and complementing each other.
In such system parts are still different from each other, according to their contribution to the whole each receives what it deserves, but they do not get excess, they do not accumulate more than what they deserve, thus they do not destroy the system like cancer does.
Superficial adjustments without changing the foundations and purpose of the whole system cannot help.

But if the paradigm that creates the solution is still one of what's important is the Investors' pockets and not the welfare of humanity then it surely will fail because it's like Einstein said, that you can't solve a problem from within the framework of the problem itself...need a new mindset.

economy, world wide and particularly in developed countries, based on services which require limited resources in order to maintain itself is doomed for catastrophe and no small organised initiatives, lacking 'job security', employment horizon, solution to the rising of inequality income (- i even assume it may give it a boost) or even producing jobs in the same scale and velocity jobs are vanished of the radar this days of low tech work, will prevent the inevitable in the long run.
by the way, it mentioned that companies using more and more 'outsourcing' and was implied that that will be the new engine for the economy, so regarding this i would say that it just a zero sum game and even minus because the social conditions, usually, not similar- no free lunch in this world.
there is no other way then capitalism but we must not forget that capitalism was what brought us here and for that i think that capitalism the way we know it is no longer relevant - it was needed in order to get us to here civilised and technologically- and it's time for new approach.

Ms. Forester de Rothschild's provides a model for the salvation of the capitalism which unfortunately is flawed on several points of foundation. Firstly, using the American example, what she fails to notice is that while in recent years, the real income of the upper 1% has tripled, while that of basically everyone else has fallen. From the statistics I have seen, that 1% now receives approximately 40% of income in the US, and possess 50% of all stocks and bonds. This before we hit the hyperinflation that the system is heading to that will wipe out the savings of common people who cannot afford the risks in lifesaving investment which are merely a manageable statistical science for the very wealthy.

There are no new markets -- consumers with additional sources of real funds -- unless martians have landed. This not to mention the deadly pace of vast production of consumables who needs, even desire, is a psychological artifice created by an army of media marketers. What "growth" there is is that of weeds in a dying garden.

What I would have like to have seen would be a leader in the present system of the stature of Ms. Forester de Rothschild have the courage to stand up and admit the failure of the Capitalist system, as Mikhail Gorbachev had in admitting the failure of the Communist system. Heaven help us all if he was also adamant in such fluff, informing us that the Politburo just needs to be more sensitive to peoples perceptions (misconceptions?) that they lack hope for a future in the present system. That 5 year plans should include a bit extra budget for training, etc.

We need to move on, in parallel with the present -- face it, dying-like-a-cancer-ridden-body system. We need to do this before we face popular uprisings and the all-too well understood horror of complete social collapse. This towards integral education, and a new, more natural system of local and global networking based upon work on basic human relationships. Mutual self-help promotion of values of mutual responsibility are crucial, through the very marketing methods developed to sell any product or service in the present system.

We need to move on to a realistic system of reasonable production, with limited work hours but the ability to purchase basic necessity and reasonable comforts. One where entrepreneurial leaders are not disgraced or threatened, but rather are rewarded in measures of popular social honor, acclaim, and and real prestige that they have never before enjoyed, in exchange for needless billions stashed away for a "rainy millennium."

The days when we can afford to ignore that human ego with unaltered primal goals let loose in any political-economic framework, communist, capitalist, or otherwise, will always work its way to the top and set up whatever necessary alliances and oligarchies it take to maximally exploit everything and everyone below. The globe is finite, and in a finite body, cancer will ultimately kill all -- including itself.

This is an excellent point. System, which is not under threat does not need to moderate itself or evolve.

But the entrepreneurs themselves cannot bridge the built-in rules that force them to cut costs and look for cheapest labor. The role of state is irreplaceable in providing missing buying power (stemming from unspent profits and personal savings).

In my theory (www.genomofcapitalism.com) I am explaining the basic contradictions causing the system to gradually deteriorate(chapters 9-10) and also possible solutions ( chapters 17-18).

Capitalism is all about constant fast evolution to adapt to the landscape. Socialism is about hitching a lot of extra mouths onto it, so that they can also get the benefit of someone elses work and ingenuity. Its the other way around, capitalism is not under threat of stagnation, it has merely won the latest round. But the socialists are coming for it the moment there is a world government. Capitalists will again have to be persherons for social priveleges like being able to take a gap year, get a free baby sitter, not to mention state dinners, politicians perqs...

Companies are not responsible for creating jobs. It is an issue of regulatory conditions and the only problem is that the balance between work and capital was undermined and the relation between income and effort. In addition the end of military subscription in Europe further strengthens unemployment.

After the anti capitalist revolutions of the first half of the 20th century, there was a need for capitalism to have the security of the consent of the population. Put crudely, Russia, China and others had overthrown the system. FDR and the New Deal in the US, the NHS and the welfare state in the UK, and other social welfare reforms in the western countries effectively bribed the crucial mass of the populace onto quiescence.

The external threat to capitalism has gone. Now there is a greater and more deadly threat. It is the same as caused the revolutions of the last century. Inequality and the failure to distribute the fruits of production has brought us to the brink.

Completely agreed about the bribery. But if you look at it from the other point of view, its blackmail of the able by the useless simply because of physical proximity. Globalization has removed the ability of physical proximity to be a tool in blackmail. Its not a bad thing. Its a triumph of brains over brawn.

Some very good thoughts on the responsibilities that corporates must take towards job creation as it cannot be relegated as a tertiary responsibility that governments and the polity have to sort out. But it leaves me with a sobering thought that if the aggregate model of the economy thrives on exporting capital and importing low skilled jobs and the corporate objective is still linked to maximizing market cap, which can be done through a plethora of strategies, but none what-so-ever is remotely dedicated to job growth (it would be quite interesting to put side by side the market cap growth of S&P 500 and the job growth of the same group in U.S. over the last three years).

Capitalism is inclusive of the useful and exclusive of the not. It's just a different word for evolution. Arguing that capitalism should provide for those that cant provide for themselves is a hard ask. Getting rid of the pressures from economically obsolete voters, who don't restrict their breeding, is the problem. No solution how that's to happen yet.

"Inclusive capitalism" is an oxymoron.
When one works for profit, when the system is driven by the idea of constant growth all the symptoms we experience today are automatic, built into the system.
The whole world economy works like a pyramid, or Ponzi scheme. In order for those at the top to keep increasing growth and profit, they need new and newer layers to join the bottom of the pyramid. But of course it is impossible.
Since the same people are required to produce and to consume, way beyond their necessities and means, and as globalization slowly removes the remaining free markets, and cheap labor, not to mention the depleted natural resources the system is not turning self-destructive.
Moreover moving markets and production to cheaper areas seriously weakened domestic production and consumption, as the article itself shows the middle class slowly becomes lower class, we are in a vicious cycle.
But those on top are not "evil" people, they simply execute what their inherent human nature dictates them.
We are all self-centered, we are all egoists, but those on top have much greater desire, hunger than those at the bottom of the pyramid.
All of us would be surprised how we changed if suddenly promoted to an important political position, to the top level of a bank or big company...
What the present system breakdown should prompt is an awakening, realizing it is our own inherent human nature that is driving us towards the cliff and beyond.
We will never find true solutions until we start changing our own nature.
Everything else would fall into place, human ingenuity, our capability to adapt is unparalleled.
Only the inbuilt operating software needs adjusting.